You have not been following. Or are ignoring what has been said.
None of mdwest's examples were people who were allowed to practise without being called to the bar and writing a bar exam. They are examples of new mobility rules (which apparently you are not familiar with - most non-lawyers are not) that allow for easier cross jurisdiction mobility. They do not obviate the need to be called to a bar to use the title attorney. They just allow you to use the term in more areas after you have been called to the bar somewhere.
In house counsel (as opposed to out house counsel), almost without exception are called to a bar, having written a bar exam etc.
Tank's daughter, as Tank admitted, was called to the bar and passed the bar exam. Tank is welcome to correct me if she did not. Her example does not support your argument. Not even close. She wrote the exams, got called to the bar and practised law. Bob's your uncle.
I know how things work in America. You apparently do not.
The new spokeswoman, as I understand it, has never written a bar exam, or been called to a bar. She has held herself out an attorney. She has claimed and used a title she has not earned.
Let me give you another analogy if you don't like the military one. Here in Ontario to become an electrician you have to work a whole bunch of apprenticeship hours, take courses and finally pass a qualification exam, pay your dues etc and get registered. Is it okay for people who havn't passed the exam or paid their dues and got registered to call themselves an electrician?
Lets try this again...
there are plenty of roles an attorney can play in the US without being admitted to the bar.. and they can certainly "practice" law, just not all law.. and there are actually many situations where attorneys can be admitted to the bar without sitting for the bar exam..
In Wisconsin for example.. attend an accredited law school.. like the Univ of Wisconsin Law School or Marquettes law school.. and you can be admitted to the bar, without sitting for the wisconsin bar exam..
https://law.wisc.edu/current/diploma_privilege/
In Oregon there is a pathway to being allowed to practice without passing the bar where attorneys can work supervised under other licensed attorneys..
The alternative program will see graduates work supervised hours to complete a legal portfolio.
www.legal.io
Utah, New Mexico, and Washington all have similar programs.. and several other states are in the process of creating "alternative" programs of their own...
Then we have specialized fields of law in the US that do not require passing a state bar exam.. an example would be patent law.. patent attorneys take the USPTO Patent Bar Exam, and usually have degrees in engineering and other science fields in addition to their JD... (my understanding is the USPTO is a much bigger bitch than state bar exams though)..
Many states in the US do not require admission to the bar to work in arbitration or mediation..
And.. if we go back to Ontario Hunters original post.. the press secretary worked in China.. where NO ONE other than Chinese nationals are allowed to sit for their equivalent of the bar exam.. MANY US and Euopean attorneys however work in legal fields in China and are involved in everything from intelectual property, to international law consulting..
If you want to dig in deeper.. more and more states and law schools in the US are sticking their middle finger up at the American Bar Association and basically telling them to kiss their assess..
California took on online laws chools as far back as 1998 and will grant law licenses and allow grads from those schools to be admitted to the california bar, despite the ABA raising hell years ago disallowing any online training for state bar applicants.. for what its worth, prior to online, CA had correspondence course law schools as far back as 1982...
After COVID, for obvious reasons the ABA started taking a lighter approach, but has still insisted that online courses be minimal.. Harvard threatened them a few years ago and challenged them to try to disallow Harvard JD's from taking a bar exam.. stating Harvard would decide how much or little online courses would be allowed, not the ABA... shortly thereafter the ABA conceeded and agreed that up to 50% of a JD can now be taught online.. Purdue and the University of Hawaii have responded with a similar Harvard middle finger and have released 100% online Juris Doctors.. my understanding is several other schools are in the process of doing the same thing.. and the states are all telling the ABA to kiss their ass..
The ABA and the bar as we currently know it are dying a much more rapid death than anyone thought they would even just 10 years ago.. the ABA and the bar exams are going to either rapidly reform... or the universities and the states in the US are going to get rid of them altogether..
